City Council Special Meeting

MINUTES CITY OF HALF MOON BAY CITY COUNCIL WEDNESDAY, JUNE 26, 2024 ADCOCK COMMUNITY/SENIOR CENTER, 535 KELLY AVENUE CONVENE SPECIAL MEETING Vice Mayor Rarback called the meeting to order at 5:10 p.m. ROLL CALL / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Vice Mayor Rarback led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Brownstone, Penrose and Ruddock (remote), and Vice Mayor Rarback ABSENT: Mayor Jimenez Pursuant to AB 2449, Councilmember Ruddock confirmed that no one over the age of 18 was in the room. REPORT OUT FROM RECENT CLOSED SESSION MEETINGS City Attorney Engberg announced that the Council met in Closed Session and no reportable action was taken. 1. ORDINANCES AND PUBLIC HEARINGS 1.A. THREE APPEALS (“MOORE APPEAL”, “FERREIRA APPEAL”, AND “NAGENGAST APPEAL”) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION FROM MAY 14, 2024, APPROVING THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF THE 555 KELLY AVENUE AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (FILE NO. PDP-23-034) The City Council disclosed ex parte communications. Housing Programs Manager Noche presented the staff report. Vice Mayor Rarback opened the public hearing.

June 26, 2024 City Council Minutes Page 2 of 3 The following individuals addressed the Council: • Rania Dare, Mercy Housing, applicant • Jennifer Moore, appellant • Mike Ferreira, appellant • Paul Nagengaast, appellant RECESS Vice Mayor Rarback called a recess at 6:05 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 6:12 p.m. with all Councilmembers present except Mayor Jimenez. The following individuals addressed the Council: • Sandra Sencion • April Vargas • Dan Hagerty • Patricia Stevenson • Jordan Grimes • RJ Jennings • David Gorn • Jane Lewis • Rabbi Moshe Heyn • Lee Gray • Sue Holland • Sandi Winter • Leslie Robertson • Joanne Rokosky • Lilli Rey • Bill Heavlin • Noreen Heavlin • Teresa Jimenez • Sophia Layne • Rocio Avila • Lourdes Patino • Sandy Vella • Kelly Delaney • Carlysle Ann Young • Lisa Warner-Caret • Martina Carrillo • Nancy Fantano • Yaya Sonoqui • Corie Schwabenland • Carolina Carbajal

June 26, 2024 City Council Minutes Page 3 of 3 • Annie Behrens • Cameron Zellers • Ismael Sandez • Doreen Gerrity • Frank Gerrity • Ellen Hage • Vaughn Harrison • Ed Vargas • Antonio Lopez • Suzanne Moore • Belinda Arriaga Kelly Hollywood, Mercy Housing, applicant, addressed comments made. Vice Mayor Rarback closed the public hearing. The Council discussed the item and asked questions. MOTION Councilmember Brownstone moved and Vice Mayor Rarback seconded a motion to deny the appeals and uphold and affirm the Planning Commission’s conditional approval of a Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review dated May 14, 2024. The question was called and the motion carried 4-0-1, Mayor Jimenez absent. MOTION Councilmember Penrose moved and Councilmember Ruddock seconded a motion to establish a subcommittee of Councilmember Penrose and Councilmember Ruddock to enter into negotiations with the applicant on the lease agreement. The question was called and the motion carried 3-1-1, Councilmember Brownstone dissenting and Mayor Jimenez absent. ADJOURNMENT Vice Mayor Rarback adjourned the meeting at 8:21 p.m. Respectfully Submitted: Approved: Jessica Blair, City Clerk Joaquin Jimenez, Mayor

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING CITY OF HALF MOON BAY WEDNESDAY, JUNE 26, 2024 ADCOCK COMMUNITY CENTER 535 KELLY AVENUE HALF MOON BAY, CA 94019 Joaquin Jimenez, Mayor Harvey Rarback, Vice Mayor Robert Brownstone, Councilmember Deborah Penrose, Councilmember Debbie Ruddock, Councilmember 5:00 PM This agenda contains a brief description of each item to be considered. Those wishing to address the City Council on any matter not listed on the agenda, but within the jurisdiction of the City Council to resolve, may come forward to the podium during the Public Forum portion of the agenda and will have a maximum of three minutes to discuss their item. Comments on City Manager Updates and Consent Calendar items should be made during the Public Forum section of the agenda. Those wishing to speak on a Business or Public Hearing matter will be called forward at the appropriate time during that item’s consideration. Please Note: Anyone wishing to present materials to the City Council, please submit seven copies to the City Clerk. Copies of written documentation relating to each item of business on the agenda are on file in the Office of the City Clerk at City Hall where they are available for public inspection. If requested, the agenda shall be available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability, as required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12132.) Information may be obtained by calling 650-726-8271. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, special assistance for participation in this meeting can be obtained by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at 650-726-8271. A 48-hour notification will enable the City to make reasonable accommodations to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II). Wi-Fi: HMB Public Password: Recreation1

HYBRID MEETING PARTICIPATION PROTOCOLS This meeting will be held in-person and via Zoom for public participation. Remote participation is provided as a supplemental way to provide public comment, but this method does not always work. The public is encouraged to attend in person to ensure full participation. Public comments may be made in-person or remotely via Zoom, and interpretation will be available. All Councilmembers and staff will participate in person. During any public comment portions, attendees may use the “raise your hand” feature and will be called upon and unmuted when it is their turn to speak. The meeting will also be streamed on Channel 27, on pacificcoast.tv, and on Facebook at www.facebook.com/cityofhalfmoonbay. Please click to join the webinar: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/87674804231 or join by phone at 669-900-9128, using Webinar ID 876-7480- 4231. If joining by phone, use *9 to raise your hand, *6 to mute and unmute. CONVENE SPECIAL MEETING ROLL CALL / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE REPORT OUT FROM RECENT CLOSED SESSION MEETINGS 1. ORDINANCES AND PUBLIC HEARINGS 1.A. THREE APPEALS (“MOORE APPEAL”, “FERREIRA APPEAL”, AND “NAGENGAST APPEAL”) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION FROM MAY 14, 2024, APPROVING THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF THE 555 KELLY AVENUE AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (FILE NO. PDP-23-034) Staff Recommendation: Conduct a public hearing on the 555 Kelly Avenue Affordable Housing Development Project (PDP-23-034), review the matters brought forth by the three appellants, and consider the following options by resolution: 1. Deny the appeals and uphold and affirm the Planning Commission’s conditional approval of a Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review dated May 14, 2024 (Draft Resolution, Attachment 1); OR 2. Grant the appeals and reverse the action of the Planning Commission from May 14, 2024 (Draft Resolution, Attachment 2). ADJOURN SPECIAL MEETING

BUSINESS OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY AGENDA REPORT For meeting of: June 26, 2024 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council VIA: Mathew Chidester, City Manager FROM: Mike Noce, Housing Programs Manager TITLE: THREE APPEALS (“MOORE APPEAL”, “FERREIRA APPEAL”, AND “NAGENGAST APPEAL”) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION FROM MAY 14, 2024, APPROVING THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF THE 555 KELLY AVENUE AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (FILE NO. PDP-23-034) ___________________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION: Conduct a public hearing on the 555 Kelly Avenue Affordable Housing Development Project (Project), PDP-23-034, review the matters brought forth by the three appellants, and consider the following options by resolution: 1. Deny the appeals and uphold and affirm the Planning Commission’s conditional approval of a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) and Architectural Review dated May 14, 2024 (Draft Resolution, Attachment 1); OR 2. Grant the appeals and reverse the action of the Planning Commission from May 14, 2024 (Draft Resolution, Attachment 2). FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact to the General Fund associated with this item other than costs associated with staff-related work on the appeals. The City has committed $1 million through a Predevelopment Loan Agreement with Mercy Housing from the City’s Affordable Housing Fund. The City has an agreement with San Mateo County for additional predevelopment funding in the amount of $1.5 million for this Project. STRATEGIC ELEMENT: This action supports the Healthy Communities and Public Safety and Inclusive Governance Elements of the Strategic Plan.

555 Kelly Ave. Appeal PDP-23-034 June 26, 2024 OVERVIEW: On May 14, 2024, the Planning Commission conditionally approved the Project (PDP-23-034). Following the Planning Commission action, three separate appeals were filed within 10 working days of the approval (Attachments 3-5). The appeals challenge the Planning Commission decision to approve the CDP and Architectural Review on a variety of issues. Under the Municipal Code, the City Council has up to 30 days to set a hearing date for appeals, and that requirement was addressed through the setting and noticing of this hearing. BACKGROUND: The Project, proposed by Mercy Housing as developer, owner and manager, consists of a new five-story building with forty (40) residential units for senior (age 55 plus) farmworkers that are deed restricted affordable to extremely low and very low-income households. One of the Planning Commission’s conditions of approval included an offer made by Mercy Housing to adjust the unit mix to 6 studios, 32 one-bedroom, and 2 two-bedroom units. This condition is contingent on Mercy Housing performing due diligence to ensure this change in unit mix will not affect previously submitted and awarded funding grants for the Project. Otherwise, the project will revert to original unit mix of 6 studios, 26 one-bedroom, and 8 two-bedroom units. Additionally, Mercy offered to reduce the project height, while keeping the project at 5 stories, from 59 feet to 54 feet 6 inches, which the Planning Commission accepted and included in their conditions of approval. The Project includes a lot line adjustment to reconfigure the driveway at Kelly Avenue and enlarge the development parcel. The building will contain on-site property management offices for Mercy, a 2,658 square foot Farmworker Resource Center (FRC) operated by local non-profit and co-applicant Ayudando Latinos A Soñar (ALAS) to serve the building residents and the Coastside farmworker community, and an 18-space ground-floor parking garage for residents of the project. The subject property is located on a 0.38-acre site owned by the City of Half Moon Bay. The full Project Plan Set is attached detailing the proposed site layout, architectural elevations, building renderings, material and color details, design inspiration, concept landscape and planting plans, grading and civil sheets, and exhibits illustrating the proposed lot line adjustment (Attachment 6). The Planning Commission held three public hearings: April 23, 2024; April 30, 2024; and May 14, 2024 (Attachment 7). A list of all public hearings and project highlights are available on the City website (Attachment 8). The applicant also has a dedicated project website that includes an overview of development highlights, community outreach, and project renderings at www.555kelly.org. DISCUSSION: Informational responses related to the grounds identified by each appeal letter are provided below. For the purpose of the staff report, the grounds of the appeals will be paraphrased. Appeal #1- Moore Appeal: Received May 23, 2024 (Attachment 3) The appellant’s concerns are identified in corresponding number order to the appeal.

555 Kelly Ave. Appeal PDP-23-034 June 26, 2024 1. Evidence for lot line adjustment is not supported in the Local Coastal Land Use Plan (LCLUP) Policy 7-2 and therefore exposes the building to liquefaction. Response to Moore Item 1: Liquefaction Zones in relation to 555 Kelly Ave. project site have been mapped by Rockridge Geotechnical and posted on the City website here. Under Public Resources Code Section 2693(c) measures will be implemented that are consistent with established practice and that will reduce seismic risk to acceptable levels. The applicant will utilize standard building practices for this type of multi-unit construction to reduce seismic risk to acceptable levels. 2. Evidence for lot line adjustment is not compliant with the Subdivision Map Act and with the City Municipal Code. Response to Moore Item 2: The lot line adjustment process has and will follow all applicable Subdivision Map Act (Govt. Code 66410) provisions, the Municipal Code, and local processes. 3. Evidence does not support that the development is exempt from CEQA under the parameters of an infill site. The building characteristics are of “unusual circumstance that distinguish it from other sites”, and the usage/impact of the Farmworker Resource Center (FRC) is unclear as it relates to traffic congestion and unsafe pedestrian conditions. Response to Moore Item 3: The development is categorically exempt from CEQA under Class 32 (Infill Development Projects) in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15332. More detail is provided in the April 23, 2024, staff report to the Planning Commission. Agendas and minutes for the Planning Commission can be found on the City Website, (https://ca- halfmoonbay.civicplus.com/314/Planning-Commission-Agendas). In Berkeley Hillside Preservation v. City of Berkeley (2015) 60 Cal. 4th 1086, the California Supreme Court found that the mere possibility of a significant impact is not, in itself, an unusual circumstance, and therefore is not enough to negate the application of a categorical exemption. Therefore, the future use of the FRC, as part of a mixed-use housing development, is not perceived as an unusual circumstance or reason to remove a categorical exemption. 4. Evidence in the findings does not support that the project is consistent with LCLUP Policy 1-5. Through the review of any recent data, the City did not justify the need for senior farmworker housing as an alternative to affordable housing for other workforce populations (i.e. teachers, service and hotel industry, students, etc.). Response to Moore Item 4: Farmworkers are identified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) as a special housing needs group due to limited income, higher rates of poverty, disproportional substandard housing conditions, extremely high rates of overcrowding, and low homeownership rates. Senior households are also identified as a special housing needs group by HCD due to the nature of aging in relation to housing challenges such as physical disabilities/limitations, fixed incomes, and healthcare costs.

555 Kelly Ave. Appeal PDP-23-034 June 26, 2024 Households must be extremely low or very low income to qualify to live at 555 Kelly Ave. in addition to the project serving a unique population that blends two special housing needs groups. Moore highlights a portion of text from LCLUP Policy 1-5, “The City shall encourage equitable civic engagement and social inclusion in public decision-making regarding coastal development, prioritizing efforts to reach low-income households and limited English-speaking households.” Mercy Housing and ALAS held three community meetings at the Half Moon Bay Public Library in 2023 (March 27, May 17, and September 27) with a combined attendance of approximately 180 people. In advance of the meetings, information was shared publicly by the applicants and through the City’s email notifications newsletter and social media to invite the community to participate. City staff agrees a diverse array of housing is needed for the Half Moon Bay community, and the Draft Housing Element plays a crucial role in setting a housing plan for the City to meet these needs. Therefore, multiple affordable housing development projects for various segments of the population, including special housing needs groups, would help contribute to meeting the current need. 5. Evidence in the record does not support that the project complies with LCLUP Policy 7- 44 and the site is prone to liquefaction. Response to Moore Item 5: LCLUP Policy 7-44 call for new buildings to minimize geologic hazard consequences. Same information is found in “Response to Moore Item 1” for construction in a liquification zone. 6. Evidence in the record does not support compliance with the CA Density Bonus Law relative to being located with one-half mile of a major transit stop as defined in the CA Public Resources Code (PRC). Response to Moore Item 6: State Density Bonus Law (Government Code § 65915) provides that cities and counties must grant certain density bonuses, concessions/incentives, and development standard waivers to housing projects that include affordable units. In addition, State Density Bonus Law provides “super density bonus” for projects that are 100% affordable to lower-income households (Govt. Code section 65915(b)(1)(G)) and located within ½ mile of a “major transit stop.” Govt. Code section 65915(o)(3) and (5); Pub. Res. Code 21155(b); Pub. Res. Code 20164.3. “Major Transit Stop” is defined as either a major transit stop included in the applicable regional transportation plan, “[a]n existing rail or bus rapid transit station,” “[a] ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service,” or “[t]he intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.” Pub. Res. Code 21155(b); Pub. Res. Code 20164.3 Only the major bus routes provision is applicable in Half Moon Bay.

555 Kelly Ave. Appeal PDP-23-034 June 26, 2024 State density bonus law contains the directive that it “shall be interpreted liberally in favor of producing the maximum number of total housing units” (Gov. Code, § 65915, subd. (r)). This directive was considered when reviewing transit service opportunities on the San Mateo County Coastside. Here in Half Moon Bay, transit service is not as robust as it is in more populated urban centers. There is no rail or bus rapid transit (BRT) service and no ferry service. There are only four fixed route bus lines that serve Half Moon Bay. All are operated by SamTrans, and all stop at either Main and Miramontes (0.3 miles from the project site) or Kelly and Church (0.1 mile from the project site): 1. Route 117 stops at Kelly and Church and Main and Miramontes hourly 16 times per day headed northbound to Pacifica and 16 times per day headed southbound to Miramontes/Moonridge during the weekdays and 15 times per day in each direction on the weekends; 2. Route 294 stops at Main and Miramontes hourly 15 times per day, seven days a week, headed eastbound to San Mateo and the Hillsdale Caltrain station; 3. Route 15 stops at Kelly and Church in the morning and afternoon peak hours. Serves local schools, weekdays only; and 4. Route 18 stops at Kelly and Church in the morning and afternoon peak hours. Serves local schools, weekdays only. In addition to the four fixed route lines noted above, SamTrans offers Ride Plus transit service in Half Moon Bay, which is a dynamic route, curb to curb, microtransit service that operates on a request basis 7 days a week from 8:00 to 5:00, through the morning and afternoon peak commute hours. This is a new feature that began service in 2023 to provide more efficient and effective service to two areas in San Mateo County: Half Moon Bay and East Palo Alto. Ride Plus functions similar to a regular bus route, but with more flexibility and potential frequency on pick up times, thereby eliminating the need to consider both bus frequency and the fixed bus schedule as well as pick-up and drop off locations. This is a service suited to environments like Half Moon Bay that do not have as many transit options. Key features of Ride Plus service include: • On-demand, shared public transportation that serves passengers using dynamic routes generated in response to individual or aggregate consumer demand, using smaller vehicles and capitalizing on widespread availability of mobile global positioning systems (GPS). • Fare and transfer policy is the same as regular SamTrans bus service. • Book ride up to seven days in advance for service within the service area (Half Moon Bay to El Granada). Dynamic route based on desired destinations including the grocery store, events, activities, or workplaces. Like normal SamTrans buses, trips may be a shared ride.

555 Kelly Ave. Appeal PDP-23-034 June 26, 2024 • Shorter wait times and better reliability in the service area than traditional fixed-route bus service. The wait time for the Ride Plus service is intended to be no more than 25 minutes from time of reservation to time of pick-up. The Main and Miramontes bus stop (0.3 miles from the project site) is the stop that staff has been identified as an “intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.” This stop receives the most robust transit service that SamTrans, Half Moon Bay’s transit provider, has to offer. The Main and Miramontes stop has both hourly service from Routes 117 and 294 and on-demand microtransit service from Ride Plus that can be scheduled at any time, thereby meeting the intent to provide reliable and timely transit at frequent service intervals in the am and pm peak hours. The service schedules of Routes 117 and 294 overlap as follows: Weekday am peak hour service at Main and Miramontes bus stop: Line Time Route 117 – north 5:54 am Route 117 – south 6:06 am Route 294 6:15 am Route 117 – north 6:55 am Route 117 – south 7:09 am Route 294 7:15 am Route 117 – north 7:56 am Route 117 – south 8:10 am Route 294 8:20 am Route 117 – north 8:55 am Route 117 – south 9:09 am Route 294 9:15 am Route 117 – north 9:55 am Route 117 – south 10:10 am Weekday pm peak hour service at Main and Miramontes bus stop: Bus Line Time Route 117 – north 2:54 pm Route 117 – south 3:12 pm Route 294 3:15 pm Route 117 – north 3:54 pm Route 117 – south 4:13 pm Route 294 4:15 pm

555 Kelly Ave. Appeal PDP-23-034 June 26, 2024 Route 117 – north 4:54 pm Route 117 – south 5:09 pm Route 294 5:15 pm Route 117 – north 5:55 pm Route 117 – south 6:08 pm Route 294 6:15 pm Route 117 – north 6:54 pm Route 117 – south 7:07 pm The addition of the Ride Plus service allows for transit service intervals at Main and Miramontes (or Kelly and Church, for that matter) to be less than 15 minutes. 7. Evidence in the finding does not support the claim that project is consistent with the Local Coastal Land Use Plan Policy 2-102(a)(ii). Response to Moore Item 7: Under the City’s adopted LCLUP, the Site is designated Public Facilities and Institutions (LCLUP Figure 2-1). Policy 2-102 of the LCLUP authorizes the City to apply a “Workforce Housing Overlay” to the Site, permitting the development of 10 units of affordable housing. While portions of the Site are currently zoned Commercial Downtown (C- D), the LCLUP provides that, “[i]n advance of updating the Implementation Plan for conformance with the policies of the 2020 Land Use Plan, the policies of the Land Use Plan shall provide the standard of review for any proposed new development.” LCLUP Policy 1-2. As a 100% affordable housing project, the Project also qualifies for a density bonus as well as concessions/waivers under the State Density Bonus Law, Government Code Section 65915, subject to both the California Coastal Act and the LCLUP. Section 65915 provides that the City of Half Moon Bay must grant certain density bonuses, concessions/incentives, and development standard waivers to a “housing development” that includes affordable units. Section 65915(i) defines “housing development” as “a development project for five or more residential units, including mixed use developments.” Therefore, the provisions of Density Bonus law apply to both the residential and non-residential portions of the building. LCLUP Policy 2-102 authorizes up to 10 units on the Project site with a Workforce Housing Overlay; this number may be increased pursuant to State Density Bonus Law for 100% affordable projects, as described in “Response to Moore Item 6.” Govt. Code Section 65915(f)(3)(D)(ii) (for 100% affordable projects within ½ mile of a major transit stop, City “shall not impose any maximum controls on density”). Utilizing this density bonus, the Project includes 40 units. 8. Request to suspend land lease negotiations with the developer and restrict the commencement of development until the City Council completes specific actions. A list of requested items is identified in the Moore appeal. Response to Moore requests (noted as Item 8 by Staff): Items related to the Safety Element, a City-wide participation plan, further analysis/studies of housing development, and a comprehensive downtown parking plan that are identified by the appellant are considered

555 Kelly Ave. Appeal PDP-23-034 June 26, 2024 individual or already in progress and separate from 555 Kelly Ave. development process. As for other items identified by the appellant: • Regarding HCD, Staff requested their input on interpretation of the “super density bonus”; however, no formal response has been provided to the City. • Regarding zoning, identified in “Response to Moore Item 7”, the LCLUP is the “standard of review” for land use designation, including projects that qualify for the Workforce Housing Overlay. In addition, State Density Bonus Law provides that no LCLUP amendment is required to grant a density bonus or related concessions/incentives/waivers. Govt. Code Section 65915(f)(5) & (j)(1). • Regarding signage, project noticing has been posted accordingly at the site in advance of public meetings and the applicant has made visual renderings and 3D modeling video available to the public on their project website. Appeal #2- Ferreira Appeal: Received May 23, 2024 (Attachment 4) 1. Questioning the process of how the RFQ proposal for a four-story building with 31 studios and 9 one-bedroom units changed when the CDP application was submitted by Mercy and ALAS for a five-story building with a unit mix containing studio, one- bedroom, and two-bedroom units, without City Council approval. Response to Ferreira Item 1: The Project described in the RFQ has differences from the CDP application submitted to the City, as shown in Table 1. Mercy Housing and ALAS performed financial analysis under changing economic conditions and obtained community input that led to a decision to submit the CDP application with the five-story design version and larger unit mix. The applicant can speak to this decision in more detail. Regarding the relationship between Planning Commission and City Council, the Planning Commission is appointed by the City Council to review projects in alignment w